Slashdot Mirror


Sense of Smell Tied To Quantum Physics?

SpaceAdmiral writes "A controversial theory that proposes that our sense of smell is based not on the shape of the molecules that enter our nose but on their vibrations was given a boost recently when University College London researchers determined that the quantum physics involved makes sense. The theory, proposed in the mid-1990s by biophysicist Luca Turin, suggests that electron tunneling initiates the smell signal being sent to the brain. It could explain why similarly shaped molecules can have very different smells, and molecules with very different structures can smell similar." Turin has now formed a company to design odorants using his theory, and claims an advantage over the competition of two orders of magnitude in rate of discovery. The article concludes, "At the very least, he is putting his money where his nose is."

3 of 169 comments (clear)

  1. Been rooting for this guy! by RobertB-DC · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I remember reading about this guy (probably on the Slashdots) years ago, and I hoped that this would be one of those rare cases of someone who is rejected by the "scientific community" and then goes on to success. There are so many scientists out there that end up on dead-end roads (I'm looking at you, Cold Fusion), that it's nice to have a reminder that there's still reason to explore.

    For proof that success is the best revenge, just check out the company's product list. They're making a killing by creating replacements for aromatic allergens.

    I guess one thing that made me think he was on to something was his reaction to the scientific community's snub -- one response I recall likened a quantum-mechanical sense of smell to "food being processed in the stomach by nuclear reactions". He did NOT go around telling the world that the scientist cabal was out to get him, or that the perfume cartel was conspiring to suppress his work. He simply went about building a successful business by *using* his hypothesis to create and license useful, concrete products.

    You know, I think this is why we have patents in the first place. Not so megacorporations can trademark "business practices" -- if I hear another insurance company or bank describe their latest gimmick with a "patent pending" disclaimer I'm gonna puke. It's so some little guy on the right track can take a risk and come out on top.

    --
    Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
  2. Re:Raised eyebrows... by ywl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am a neuroscientist who used to work on olfaction.

    His theory is unconventional but it didn't break any known biological principles. Odors are detected by olfactory receptor *neurons* located on the olfactory epithelium inside the nose (for vetebrates). There are some olfactory receptor *molecules* on the membrane of these neurons - to the confusion of most people, both the neurons and molecules are sometimes called "olfactory receptors". The consenses for the last decade is that these molecules recognize the shape of odor molecules through chemcial interactions. The binding of the odor molecules to the receptors changes the membrane potential of the olfactory receptor neurons which then transmit the information to the brain.

    What he is proposing is instead of, or in additional to, the chemical interactions, the olfactory receptor molecules can recognize the odorant molecules through quantal properties. It's unconventional but it is not totally implausible. The interactions between receptor molecules and agonist (the molecules that bind and activate the receptors) are molecular level events. I'm not a quantal physicist but weird things could perceivably happen at those levels. And after the olfactory receptor molecules being activated, the signal goes to the brain in the same way as the conventional theory.

    The weakness of the theory is more since it's an unconventional claim, it needs more than usual proof. The experiment is not hard to do and after ten years, I haven't heard of a single high profile experimental paper to support it (I could have missed it). So, it probably should be classified as a neat but unproven theory.

  3. Whole chemistry is based on quantum mechanics by poszi · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I'm not a neuroscientist but I work on molecular interactions and the idea is not that far fetched. In general all interactions involve quantum mechanics. Protein folding, DNA helix, it all requires dispersion which is a purely quantum-mechanical effect. I'd say the whole chemistry is immersed in quantum mechanics. Well, color can only be explained by quantum excitations, so why not smell?

    This theory is "revolutionary" because biochemists use classical simulations. Quantum mechanics is very difficult to apply to such large systems in practice but these molecules definitely are governed by quantum mechanics like all molecules.

    --

    Save the bandwidth. Don't use sigs!